The mewling pencil and his approach to common sense in tower block fires

So he considers the occupants of greenfell to lack common sense?, perhaps he needs a live situation experience from the fire service in a smoke filled stairwell building with zero visibility to experience what a single lungful of toxic and particulate laden smoke does to his lungs in such an environment.

I’d happily do time for bitch slapping him up and down the stairwell

This article explains very well what happened and why various procedures were followed .

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/grenfell-tower-fire-one-year-one-kensington-a8397276.html?fbclid=IwAR3qx1f92DGPJD6eeUe53DCBC79LeHp-2SICjhoWo3AS8hTCZF8rimpT1_U

Sums him up well

“Jacob Rees-Mogg talking about common sense is a bit like my dog talking about wifi. It’s surprising he even understands the concept.”

This article explains very well what happened and why various procedures were followed .

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/grenfell-tower-fire-one-year-one-kensington-a8397276.html?fbclid=IwAR3qx1f92DGPJD6eeUe53DCBC79LeHp-2SICjhoWo3AS8hTCZF8rimpT1_U

That article seems like compulsory reading for anyone opening their flap on the subject, but I know nothing about it. I’d be interested to hear from people who actually have proper understanding – bruneep for example?

Its already confined and difficult for us to get our gear in place using high rise stairwells as it is in a fire without it being flooded in smoke due to people opening all the doors, it’s also very difficult when you have just a few people trying to decend the stairs as your on the way up so god only knows what would have had happened had everyone tried to exit. I personally think more would have died but that’s just my opinion

So he considers the occupants of greenfell to lack common sense?

I think it says something about him. You either trust that it has been built correctly and so it is safe to follow the sealed compartment view or you take a cynical approach about the budget spend and so dont trust it. Cant imagine why someone like him would choose the latter.
To take firestarter’s comment this pretty much sums up the problem. On an individual level it makes sense to get out immediately but if everyone does that then it becomes a nightmare hence why we should be able to rely on the building design to remove the need.
If it wasnt utterly unethical and liable to end in lawsuits it would be an interesting experiment in a routine building evacuation. Do it with the normal bored its a drill vs lob a couple of smoke grenades and preferably a heat generator. I suspect would end up with plenty of second homes for lawyers once the panic kicks in.

That article seems like compulsory reading for anyone opening their flap on the subject

Seconded. Certainly Rees-Knobjockey would do well to have a read before running his haunted Victorian gums.

I’m very much with Stormzy on his view of Rees-Mogg:

https://news.sky.com/story/stormzy-jacob-rees-mogg-is-an-actual-piece-of-s-for-grenfell-comments-11854999

The Grenfell fire was fairly unique, in British fire fighting so there’s obviously lessons that can be learned. But the conspiracy bollocks is simply beyond contempt. From the Independent article.

There were 65 rescues in total. All the following would be against the rules, but firefighters did them: going above the fire without breathing apparatus to knock on doors and get people out; attempting snatch rescues without breathing apparatus; going above the fire without a hose and sufficient water; going past the time of whistle and into your safety margin of the last 10 minutes on your breathing apparatus; taking your mask off in a job and putting it on a casualty’s face; multiple wears and entries with breathing apparatus; carrying an adult casualty alone; carrying more than one casualty at a time.

That’s a really impactful article from the ex fire bloke. The problem is not enough people Have this info to hand and make comments where they should simply keep schtoom. Very often I have this kind of discussions with normally well intentioned well educated people, but whereas I’m more likely to remain impartial without knowing facts, I find that others will very quickly use heor own e perience or though process to comment on the actions of professional people.. It drives me up the wall (and causes arguments).. The firefighters did a brilliant job, unfortunately media and media whores like to spread garbage which only flames those suffering looking for answers..

Something that struck me was the comment about the forensic teams, that really must be a hard job, from experience seeing body parts after an incidence haunts you..

No grown ups take the cconspiracy theory seriously

What is odd is that so many people are jumping in on the side of Rees mogg, Andrew Bridgen & now wannabe Katie Hopkins is at it too?

Surely this has destroyed any chances of the Tories retaking Kensington, not to mention causing even more distress

“But we want very clever people running the country, don’t we Evan?”

Andrew Bridgen’s explicit support of Rees-Mogg is somehow even more offensive than the original #ReesMoggResignpic.twitter.com/kATcvCAr6T

— dave ❄️ 🥕 🧻 (@mrdavemacleod) November 5, 2019

All this is true but most of the people who survived the Grenfell fire did so BECAUSE they used common sense, ignored Fire Brigade advice to stay put and fled the building. They weren’t any more rich or powerful than the people in the building who stayed put and tragically died. https://t.co/mKPYFwnZRo

— Julia Hartley-Brewer (@JuliaHB1) November 5, 2019

I heard those Andrew Bigden comments on the radio driving home. I couldn’t quite believe my ears.

Not just JRM

David Lammy on Newsnight tonight”we learnt that there were firefighters who could have knocked on doors but didn’t”

Whether it’s in the report or not it’s not something that should be said in a simplified manner which he did tonight

The wannabe Hopkins has just made me utter profanity on the Twitter for the first time. Utterly despicable (her attitude and my language).

so the haters have managed to remove Dani Cotton.

The inquiry from the very start was skewed looking for scapegoats for that night and probably those ultimately responsible will walk away without being held to account.

The Grenfell Action Group blog highlighted the safety and welfare shortcomings of Grenfell many years before the fire .
They predicted this disaster .
And remarkably they have defended Dany Cotton and in doing so the firefighters of LFB.
https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/

From the above
In 2015 a group of residents had been concerned about failures and delays in the process of the works, the noise and inconvenience, concerns about fire breaks, the position of boilers in hallways, exposed gas pipes, the loss of emergency road access, the loss of green space at Lancaster Green to build the school close to the Tower, and fears that the building itself may be dangerous post-refurb.

Rather than take residents’ concerns seriously, in November 2016 the Council sent a ‘cease and desist’ letter to the complainants, stating that they were frightening residents.

Six months later a fridge now deemed so dangerous it has been withdrawn from sale burst into flames, and fire services were called. Unknown to them the fire had burnt through a UPVC window frame and flames had begun to tear up the building fuelled by a devastating combination of flammable insulation and flammable cladding. Then –

The stair lighting failed.
The smoke vents failed.
The fire doors failed.
The fire breaks between floors failed.
Badly fitting UPVC windows blazed and emitted deadly gases.
The insulation and cladding failed, due to their combustibility and to poorly fitted breaks and gaps which acted like a chimney.
The gas supply could not be turned off for 18 hours.
And the ‘value engineered’ insulation (now banned) and cladding combination described as ‘solid petrol’ raged for hours.
The devasting fire that had been predicted by residents turned a concrete frame building with fire safe compartmentation, where ‘Stay Put’ policy had worked for 40 years, into a 24 storey bonfire.

Into this nightmare, firefighters had to work to save lives with equipment inadequate for a combination of disastrous errors that should never have been allowed. They went in untrained for a disaster that should never have happened.

And here lies the problem with this back-to-front Inquiry.

And all this according to Grenfell United is Dany Cottons fault

Maybe they should have listened to the authors of the Grenfell Action Group who actually know the facts and the real causes of this disaster
And it wasn’t Dany Cotton
Shame on them

bruneep. I have followed what has being going on and thinking exactly the same.

A residential building can be allowed to be designed and constructed with horrendous fire risk flaws, and now the focus of all problems is at the feet of those dealing with a situation in the moment.

I cant help but think that there are executives in the cladding manufacturing firm saying, ‘see the death toll would have been lower if the fire brigade procedures were better’. The whole thing is arse about tit.

Fire rescue systems are like PPE. They should be an absolute last resort. Potential dangers should be design out first.

so the haters have managed to remove Dani Cotton.

Had me absolutely raging at the TV when I heard this tonight, a scapegoat for those that do not understand the situation she was in. It’s tragic for the families they are looking at who to blame, she was not one of them.

I’ve just read the latest post on Grenfell United. It’s worth the time.

This seems to be proper scapegoating.
That is set against lack of names and details over cladding specifiers, advisors, consultants, council officers and more.
Shocking.

https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/

I’ve just read the latest post on Grenfell United. It’s worth the time.

I’ve reads it too. I’ve also read the entire phase 1 Inquiry report. I understand the criticism about dealing with the response to the fire first rather than the fundamental flaw, but there may be lessons to learn quickly whilst other buildings are still at risk and so I can see some pragmatism in doing it the way they have; fundamentally Inquiries are not about assigning blame – but learning lessons.

Had she said, either in the Inquiry or in a public statement afterwards,words to the effect of “That fire was unlike anything LFB have ever experienced, imagined or trained for, and so there must be lessons we can learn. I support fully my officers who executed the rescue operation completely as I would have expected them to at the time, and who showed resilience and courage in the face of unprecedented circumstances. However, all UK fire services must reflect on the situation we found ourselves in, and how we will identify in a major incident if the presumption behind the buildings response to a fire is flawed and how and when to change the protocol to minimize casualties. We will also need to consider how any such change could be communicated in a difficult and complex environment and balance the risk of sticking to the established doctrine versus the risk inherent with mass evacuation in such difficult environments. It is the responsibility of government to set regulations to minimize risk from fire, and to correctly enforce those regulations. It is our responsibility to respond to fires even when they are outside of the possibilities the regulations should permit – and fire services must plan for the very unlikely; in times of constrained resources we will never be able to imagine every scenario or invest in training and equipment for situations we believe are impossible but it is the responsibility of the leadership of LFB to balance the ability to respond to the routine with the capability to adapt to the unforeseen and we will of course learn from this tragedy so that if we ever find ourselves in such horrific circumstances again we can minimize the loss of life.”

Then she would not have faced anywhere near as much pressure to go. If she has become a scapegoat it is because she has allowed herself to present a degree of arrogance. If she had really wanted to go with a bang, since she was retiring anyway, she could have said, “too much time has been wasted on planning for, training and responding to terrorist scenarios, driven by government hysteria about very rare and largely unforeseeable events rather than dealing with the fundamental and much more basic risks which we have become complacent towards. Combined with the demands on fire services to respond to climate related emergencies, which the government is doing little to reduce the ongoing risk from, and the ongoing collision risks from ever busier roads which are poorly policed, the demands on the LFB are bigger and wider than ever before.”

What I will say, is if this is the response for her, then I’d really not want to be the people who actually enabled the disaster in the first place.

Whenever there’s any sort of mess up in the uk the same thing happens. Those at the top start looking at those beneath them to see who they can blame.
“Can I blame the person immediately below me? No, they’ve got too much on me. What about the person below them?”, etc.
As soon as they reach the highest ranking person who cannot punch upwards they put all the blame on them. I’ve seen this over and over agin. Sometimes they have to go right to the bottom to find somebody, but usually it’s someone in middle-management who has little influence and few friends. It never goes to the high-ups.

Somewhat agree with Poly tbh, I don’t really see how she could have acted differently re the fire but some of the response afterwards really opened her up for criticism. I don’t think that should be enough, frankly, but it seems like the chink that was used.

But yep, so far the only people who’ve lost out are residents and her. That can’t stay the case.

Given how this thread started, it is ironic that now the establishment is circling their wagons and acting in self preservation mode, the Grenfell groups could look to Dame Lawrence and the Hillsbrough families for inspiration on fighting a long battle for the truth and justice.

Don’t let the authorities of the hook, keep on pushing to get the truth out there, too often us brits give up too easily against the establishment, but we have examples that the truth can be revealed with perseverance. And in this case, there looks to be more friends than enemies in the media, lets hope that doesn’t slip away.

I read an article by a firefighter – wish I could find it again – about what the actual circumstances were like, and how far from realistic it is to imagine that “using common sense” the residents could have strolled to safety. One thing that stuck in my mind was that we recoil from an open oven that is 200 deg, so how should someone open a flat door when there is an inferno outside that is 600-800 deg? Add to that the toxic smoke, the crowded stairs etc etc etc. Maybe “stay put” was the wrong advice or maybe it was the right advice – how can we tell? Seems to me that a judgement has been made before that has been properly demonstrated. Maybe when the firefighters arrived on the scene it was already too late to change much, given the speed of spread of the fire?

(Obviously all I know is what I read, so comments of bruneep and co. much valued 🙂 )